SENATE REPORT 


ON THE 


Chicago Police System 


a Committee of Investigation Appointed by the 40th General 
tt Assembly, Special Session 1897-98 


Adopted by the Senate Lebruary 17, 1898. 


SPRINGFIELD, ILL: 
PHILLIPS Bros., STATE PRINTERS. 


1898. 


a ae te we 


the best citizens of all parties, shall enforee an honest and practical civil 


your earnest attention at this time. 


SENATE REPORT. 


In issuing his proclamation convening the 40th General Assembly 


in Extraordinary Session December 7, 1897, the Governor included, 


among other subjects urgently demanding immediate legislation, ~~ 
‘An act to establish police boards providing for non-partisan police 
in all cities of the State containing over 100,000 inhabitants;” and in 
his message to the Legislature assembled in pursuance of his call he 
referred to the subject in the following terms: 


EXTRACT FROM THE GOVERNOR’S MESSAGE. 


! desire to call your attention to, the necessity of an act to establish a non- 
partisan police force in cities of this State which contain over one hundred 
thousand inhabitants. 


In including this subject in the eall, at the earnest request of hundreds of 
our best citizens of all parties, I am influenced by a desire to secure for our 
great metropolis a police system second to none inthe world. Every interest 
of the people who pay the taxes to support it demands that the vast machin- 
ery of the police system shall be used only for the prevention and punishment 
of erime and the vigilant protection of life and property. Experience proves 
that these results can be secured only by divorcing it entirely from politics. 
The experience of the cities of Boston, New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, 
Baltimore, Washington, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Nashville, Denver, 
Detroit, Kansas City, San Francisco, Cleveland, and, in fact, all the principal 
cities of the United States, proves that they succeeded in obtaining an effi- 
cient police service only after they had secured the government of their police 
force by metropolitan boards of either bi-partisan or mixed politics. 


Chieago presents the only instance of a police force used as an instrument 
for the sole benefit of the political party which happens to be in power.after 
each election. Both parties have been to blame in this respect; but the time 
has now come when all good citizens should make an effort to correct this 
great evil. The efforts of the Civil Service Commission are and will be of no © 
effect until they are supplemented by a board of control, which, composed of 


service, assuring to every member of the force, who is competent and faithful, 
permanence in his position, and putting it beyond the power of politicians to 
control him by making his tenure of office depend upon his political com- 


plexion. 


The opportunity offered by a special session to consider and mature such a 
measure, without political prejudice, I feel fully warrants me in asking for it 


¥0.2\4 


4 


On December 15th Senator Lundin, by unanimous consent, offered 
the following resolution which, under the rules, was ordered to lie 
upon the table for one day: 


SENATE RESOLUTION No. 9. 


WHEREAS, His Excellency, Governor John R. Tanner, has included in his 
eall the enactment of a law providing for an act to establish police boards,, 
providing for non-partisan police in all cities of 100,000 inhabitants; and 


Wuereas, A bill has been introduced in the Senate—Senate Bill No. 9— 
providing for the enactment of such a law; and 

WHEREAS, Numerous charges and various scandals have hevetotorae arisen. 
in regard to ‘the management of the police in the city of Chicago; and 

WHEREAS, The morals, safety and security of the people of the city of Chi- 
cago demand a complete protection; and 


WHEREAS, It has been charged that the enactment of such a law is a mere 
subterfuge designed to abolish civil service, overwhelmingly adopted by our 
citizens, irrespective of party; therefore, be it 

Resolved, That a committee of seven be appointed by the President of the 
Senate; and further, be it 


Resolved, That said committee be clothed with full power ge act, to send for 
books and papers, to summon and subpcena witnesses, to administer oaths, 
and to thoroughly and fully investigate the subject, and to report their con- 
clusions and findings as early as possible to the Senate of this Special Session. 


The foregoing Senate Resolution No. 9, on being taken up by the 
Senate for consideration, January 6, 1898, Senator Lundin moved to 
amend by increasing the number of the committee from five to seven. 
The amendment was agreed to and the resolution as amended was 
adopted without division; and the President of the Senate announced 
the following named Senators as members of the committee provided 
for in the foregoing resolution: 


COMMITTEE APPOINTED UNDER RESOLUTION No. 9. 


Berry, Orville F., Republican. 
Aspinwall, Homer F. , Republican. 
Baxter, Delos W., Republican. 
Lundin, Frederick, Republican. 
Bollinger, Albert C.; Republican. 
Mahoney. Joseph P., Demoerat. 

- Dresser, Nathaniel, People’ s Party. 


February 10, 1898, the Investigating Committee, through ee chair- 
man, Senator Berry, made its report to the Senate, whic report was 


ordered printed and its consideration made a special order for Tues- 
day, February 15, 1898. 


The full text of this report is reproduced, without alteration or 
emendation, on page 6 of this pamphlet. 


The consideration of the committee’s report having been post- 
poned from:February 15, it was taken up February 17, 1898, and, 
after debate, was adopted by the following vote—33 Republicans and 
me Democrat voting for the adoption of the report, and 8 Democrats * 
oting against adoption: 


D ‘ 


¢ 


VOTE IN THE SENATE ON THE ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE POLICE 
INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE. 


The following voted yes: 


ABBMWON Yess, wade y sedate ack the Republican | PLUM DOV CVs Re athlete eee ae Republican 
Ain walle eee a aie ee aay =" SEP UTE Hey ne ek eon Se ne on Hae. ty 
TRANG cra ae ta cane ce ern ee : : TURD AR ards va cee eae nh oi ata o's ; f 
peas Fs arndc avata bee eae meer ts . ae MELE, onan Sie Rare one che 
: Sarde ade Nees ie peste ard « BUOUS Ws) acres oe ela aoe Le Rees Democrat 

BOM Pen Sneek: Goes ee MorrkSond 4c sack Made snes Republican 
Gampboll noo, Rs ee ie Munroe ee ours eee ac aakte an 

USGS, cls tes OER ee eer aoe ae is Netterstroiic.. omnes eee ae 
Crawford hivieasec sl hee eee ‘a PUTED ETT yee ols ee ee co cles tani oe 

LTE LSUD, A sue hinge eee a nine ea ap Saw. Ver i seeee ene NS So ae Nee a ey 
OS ine) ORS BNR han i a Pie aA ns DALEK Shins tarot eee aes See fe 
HVANS... 05 ieee eee eee eee FOSS, Sti GolehomMli, 4.araeis 202) aoa nes i 
MABHOL :. ayatintwisgale toads gh seisies e Sullivan, mui sean sg ere ey wripen eae pes 
Hae atriekss.c meats coe tee ear fs emt pleton: vouuussses ods seek eae bs 
PN a: ce a freee sae ee - Be eas cd ie: Ne Me Bie es cen ed ae 9 
ls Lie Speers © Se sles Soe ba baer ania a ‘a Tid ult Oy MAA” i REC RAUURY Ae Fe See ete AGL as tit 
Phar dlarecares ie Ses ee co tng oes Ae IVE GEAG Rtn ass, erratic eee hn Ane 34 


The following voted no: 


| b 
itl eye. 8 eee ae ey Democrat’ | Mountssiiais..ct.u. oles. sean kana oe Democrat 
PISHOTi SAE, Se Was ee ee needle s | OB GIGI Se tite Mayda ces cc Deore. a 
MEARS ee. re elo Mae ces sik woeineeie a SGN Bae tidk due gm Ue eek 1 Peta tate a a en Ase aS 
BIRR OMMOL ohn srt aie Hato os see eles a : OO 
| INR Mi cic c sleses) EOYs.» > n al eee tate 8 
| 


BV ir Va ceo eeige ners i ea arog Mev is 


On February 24, the last day of the Special Session, no legislation 
having been effected concerning Police Boards, Senator Hamilton 
offered in the Senate the following resolution providing for the con- 
tinuance of the Investigating Committee, which resolution, by unan- 
imous consent, was taken up for consideration and adopted: 


SENATE RESOLUTION No. 15. 


WHEREAS, The Senate Committee appointed to investigate the police force 
of Chicago has, in the limited time at its disposal, unearthed a most deplor- 
able state of affairs in the management and control of said police force; and 


WHEREAS, Said committee’s investigations have established that the most 
flagrant violations of the civil service law have been brazenly practicea by 
those in authority in control of the said police force, and 


WHEREAS, It is undoubtedly in the interest of good government in the city 
of Chicago, and for the protection and preservation of the property and lives 
of the citizens of Chicago that the unlawful practices in said police foree 
should be turther investigated and made known to the general public, in order 
that the existing evils may be properly: remedied; therefore be it, and it is 
hereby 


Resolved, That said Investigating Committee be authorized to continue its 
investigation and report the result thereof to the next regular session of this 
Senate; Provided, That said committee shall only receive as pay per diem for 
the days actually employed in such investigation, and that such per diem and 
the trecessary expenses of said investigation be paid only upon the certificate 
of an itemized account by said committee, which shall be approved by the 
Governor. 


Resolved further, That said committee be and it is hereby authorized to send 
for all persons, books and papers which it desires in said investigation. 


6 


s 


The report of the Police Investigating Committee, adopted by the 
Senate February 17, 1898, by a vote of 35 yeas to 8 nays, reads as 
follows: 


REPORT OF POLICE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE. 
To the President and Members of the Senate: 


Your committee, appointed under Resolution No. 9, for the purpose of in- 
vestigating the management of the police of the city of Chicago, and other 
matters appertaining to the proper administration of police affairs of said eity, 
having performed that duty, beg leave'to report as follows: 


Your committee, at its first meeting, in order to properly investigate and 
come to an intelligent conclusion on'the subject matter contained in said res- 
olution, and to procure and furnish this body with as much information as 
possible, determined to proeeed to investigate along the following lines, and 
procure evidence and information that'in their judgment would be of value to 
this body, as well as to the citizens of .the State of Illinois. They therefore _ 
proceeded in their examination to take up the foilowing topies for investiga- 
tion: 

* 1. The- Civil Service Law. 
2. The manner of its enforcement. 
Its success or failure. 
4+. The police pension law; its suecess or failure. 
5. The actual workings of the police department. 


3, The condition of the city as to the enforcement of the law and protection 
to hfe and property by the police. 


7. The management, control and direction given the department by the 


chief of police. ~ . 
8. The workings of the police justices’ courts. 


i 


THE CIVIL SERVICE LAW. 


The Thirty-ninth General Assembly passed an act entitled ‘‘An act to regu- 
late the civil service of cities,’?’ which was approved March 20, 1895. This act 
provides for the appointment by the mayor of three commissioners, no more 
than two from one political party. It further provides that such commission- 
ers shall hold no other lucrative office or employment under the United States 
nor the State of Ilhnois, or any municipal corporation, or political division 
thereof. Said commissioners shall hold their office for three years, or until 
their successors are appointed and qualified. It further provides that the 
mayor may, in his discretion, remove any commissioner for incompetency, 
neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office, but not otherwise. It further pro- 
vides that said commissioners shall classify the offices and places of employ- 
ment of said city with reference to the examinations therein provided, and 
that the offices and places so classified by the commission shall constitute 
the classified civil service list of said city, and that no appointments to any 
such offices or places shall be made except under and according to the rules 
of said act. 

This act, with some exceptions and some delays before it went fully into 
effect, was adopted by the city of Chicago by a large majority, it thereby 
becoming a part of the organie law of the city of Chicago, and so long as it 
was in force all the officers of said city, including the executive head, were 
parent to enforce it as mueh as any other law of the State or ordinance of 
the city. 

The lapse of time before this act took full effeet made it impossible to tell 
just how it would have been enforced by the first administration of the city of 
Chicago when the same took effect. It 1s only necessary to say that that ad- 
ministration took the advantage given it by the law itself and adjusted the 
offices of the city of Chicago for that administration, practically without any 
reference to the civil service act as it had a legal right to do. 


Co 


a 


) Shi eo as «Cae 


7 


The first Board of Commissioners appointed by Hon. George B. Swift, Mayor 
of the city of Chicago, was Hon. John M. Clark and Christopher Holtz, Repub- 
heans, and Robert A. Waller, Democrat. This Commission was in office upon 
the election of the present mayor of the city of Chicago. The term of John M. 
Clark, by virtue of the law, expired July 1, 1898; Robert A. Waller, July 1, 
1897, and Christopher Holtz, July 1, 1899. This Commission seems.to have 
had the confidence of the people of the city of Chicago. Immediately upon 
Mayor Harrison’s election, he appointed Robert A. Waller, the Democratic 
member of the Commission, city comptroller, thereby removing him from the 
Commission; and while the law provides that'the commissioners can not be re- 
moved except for cause, or malfeasance in office, without any such charge the 
other two members of said Commission were immediately removed, and the 
mayor appointed the present Commission, who immediately organized and 
proceeded with the business of said Commission. 


Your committee were favored the first two days of their investigation with 
the presence of the present Civil Service Commissioners, and such of their 
records as the committee desired to use, but after that the Commission, for 
reasons best known to themselves, withdrew entirely from the committee, and 
declined to be present or to allow any of their records to be examined or 
brought before your committee, but fortunately for the committee, and we 
think very unfortunately for the Commission, we had procured a sufficient 
amount of evidence. with what we were able to ascertain in other directions, 
to fully satisfy the committee of the management and workings of the Civil 
‘Service Commission, and your committee did not deem it necessary to under- 
take to enforce the presence of either the Commissioners or any of thei 
records. The Secretary of the Commission, the committee desires to say, Was 
present whenever requested, and furnished the committee all the evidence 
that was in his power as such secretary to furnish, and was of great assist- 
ance to your committee. 


EL 
THE MANNER OF ITS ENFORCEMENT. 


The evidence before your committee fully justifies the committee in saying’ 
that the Civil Service Law, under the present administration of the city of 
Chieago, has not been enforced, neither in letter nor in spirit, and in the 
judgement of your committee it has not been allowed to prevent the appoint- 
ment of any man that the administration desired appointed, whether he com- 
plied with the Civil Service law or not. Even heads of departments in the 
city have seen proper to openly and defiantly refuse to comply with the re- - 
quests of the Commission and to appoint men who have qualified-under the law. 


We quote one instance: An examination had taken place for a certain 
office. Only three men passed the examination. There was a vacancy in 
that office. The man who stood highest was certified by the Commission to 
the foreman of that department. He presented his certificate, which entitled 
him to the office, to the foreman. He hesitated a moment, but at once arose 
to the oeeasion, and informed that Civil Service man that he had that morn- 
ing abolished that particular office, and therefore he could not be appointed, 
and he was not; while this same foreman placed a man in that position, but 
under another name, who at the time your committee was in session was 
doing the werk and drawing the salary which, under the law, the other man 
was entitled to. The difference seemed to be, one was qualified and had 
complied with the law, but did not have any particular pull, while the other 
man had veither passed the examination nor’ was qualified according to law; 
yet the mayor and his appointees wanted him, and that was sufficient to pro- 
eure his appointment. 


One other instance of the working of this law by the Commission: W. D. 
Darst, a professional cook, at the House of Correction; the evidence showed 
he had been there for a number of years. Hisrecommendations were of the 
highest character; he had taken the Civil Service examination and had passed 
satisfactorily. In July, 1897, a new superintendent, A. Sturn, was appointed. 
Shortly after his appointment, Louis Kadlitz, an ex-convict, whom Superin- 
tendent Crawford had discharged from the same position for drunkenness 


8 


and inattention to duty, was making a vigorous campaign, backed by a 
prominent politician of the Tenth ward. On October 27th, when Darst 
went to get his pay, he was told that he was discharged and Kadlitz was to 
take his place. Darst immediately asked the superintendent what were the 
charges against him, and he replied there were no charges, ‘‘You are simply 
given a good old-fashion political boost for the good of the service.”’ Darst 
said to him, ‘‘But how does your administration get over the Civil Service?”’ 
The superintendent replied, ‘‘I don’t know. You are out, and the other fel- 
low isin. See??? But Darst, knowing the law, insisted that he could not be 
discharged without a trial, and went to the Commission and stated his ease. 
They said they would look it up. They said there were no charges filed 
against him, and he kept insisting until finally he went there and was told 
that the following were the charges, and the following paper, which we quote 
exactly, was read to him: : 


‘City OF CHICAGO 


House of Correction, California Ave. and 28th Street, — 
Adolph Sturn, Chicago, Ill., Nov.’ 9. 1897. 
Superintendent. 


“J. M. GLENN, Esq., 
Secretary Civil Service Commission: 


‘‘DEAR Sir:—I have been asked by your honorable body to deseribe in de- 
‘‘tail the meaning of ‘for the good of the service.’ LEvery day I find on the 
‘‘mittimus of persons sent to the House of Correction by justices of the 
‘‘neace: ‘Cause: A tendency leading to breach of the peace,’ and this covers 
‘fa multitude of sins. So does the remark, ‘for the good of the service’ em- 
‘‘brace a large number of meanings, foremost of all is the sense of preventing 
‘‘the detrimental effect it would have if no change was made. 


Very respectfully, : 
A. STUBN:” 


These were the charges upon which Darst was tried. Darst insisted to the 
Commission that they were not charges at all. But the trial proceeded, and 
it is unnecessary to say that a Commission that would recognize such a paper 
as the above for any purpose of a trial, would readily find the man guilty, 
and his removal was sustained and the other fellow is still holding the job. 


Numerous instances of. this kind in other departments of the Civil Service 
of Chicago and like action by the Commission might be mentioned. But it is 
enough to say that the evidence justifies us in finding that in every instance 
where it was the desire of the mayor or his political backers to have a man 
removed and some person put in his place, that the Civil Service law never 
stepped in the way; and with all of the evidence before the Committee they 
are unable to find where it ever prevented the removal of a single man or en- 
abled one to get a position unless his appointment was satisfactory to the 
present administration of the city of Chicago. 


We now turn our attention particularly to the law as applied to the police- 
men, the appointment of which is of a much more serious character even 
than in any of the other departments of the service, as the life, liberty and 
' property of the citizens of the city of Chicago depend in a very large degree 
upon the honesty, faithfulness and ability of the policemen of the city. 


Under a former administration a large number of policemen had been re- 
lieved from office and friends of the administration, we take it, had been ap- 
pointed, but at that time the Civil Service Law was not in force. , As soon as 
the administration changed and Mayor Harrison became mayor, a demand was 
made by many of these policemen and their friends, that they should be re- 
instated on the force. Under the law, as it then stood, there was no way for 
policemen to be appointed except by taking the Civil Service examination, 
and this examination, under the law, must be open to every person who can 
fulfill its requirements, and in order to meet the demands of the mayor and 
to avoid the law, the Commission ealled for an examination for expert police- 
men. No such a thing is known to the law. When that was done the Com- 
mission requested the clief of police to furnish the Commission with the past 
records of all men who in their application stated they had once been police- 


eo 


Q 
vu 


men. ‘This information was furnished to the Commission by the police 
department, showing when every man had originally been appointed, how 
many times he had been discharged, and for what cause. These records. 
were taken by the Commission and examined by them, and out of some 500 
or 600 names, the records of which were furnished the Commission, the 
recor ds of about 100 of them were so bad that the Commission marked them 

‘rejected’? and would not, in their view of the law and discharge of their 
duty to the people of the city of Chicago, permit them to take an examination 
or to certify them for appointment. Many of these men, whose records they 
had before them, had been discharged from the service, many of them two 
and three times, some as high as six and seven times, and they were dis- 
charged for such offenses as intoxication; being found drunk while on duty; 
found intoxicated in saloons; off duty without permission; firing pistols in 
the street while on duty and under the influence of liquor; willful maltreat- 
ment of prisoners; willful maltreatment and assaults upon citizens; immoral 
conduct and conduct. unbecoming a police officer. 


As we have already stated, the Commission refused a large number of these 
“men examination; but the records show that when this fact was ascertained, 
requests would come from the mayor to know why such and such a man 
was not examined or certified to. A member, or members of the Commission 
would then send for the rejected paper and after a consultation with the al- 
dermen or whoever came, the paper first marked ‘‘rejected’’? would come 
baék to the secretary marked ‘‘approved’’ and this man would be certified and 
placed upon the police force. This continued from day to day and week after 
week until practically all of the men who were originally rejected. by this 
Commission were certified for appointment on the police force. 


The first afternoon of your Committee’s investigation of this branch of 
work they found sixty-nine (69) men with records that in the judgment of 
your Committee were such as to unfit them for service on the police force of 
any city, and with a large number of records yet to investigate, which records 
were in the hands of the Commission. They were taken from the Committee 
and the original memoranda, as furnished the Commission prior to their ap- 
pointment, was refused your Committee, and the box in which they were kept, 
as shown by the evidence. was placed in the vault, and locked, and the sec- 
retary, taking the key with him, left the office; that during the night the 
Commission in session sent for the box, took it out of the vault and broke it. 
open, for what purpose your Committee can only surmise. It is sufficient to 
say that they, from that date, refused to allow your Committee to further 
investigate the contents of that box or-to see the memoranda furnished in 
reference to the qualification and character of the men certified by them for 
policemen thereafter. At the time this box was broken open and these 
memoranda further examined, the evidence shows that there was a consultation 
of the different heads of departments of the eity with the Commission. Why 
it was that they came to the conclusion that their records should not be open 
to the public, and that the Committee should not have the benefit of them, 
your Committee are unable to say, unless it be that a further examination 
would disclose even greater errors and more serious violations than had 
already been discovered. 


Your Committee does not believe that it is in the best interests of good 
government and the protection of life and property that when a man is once) 
appointed to the important position of policeman of the city of Chicago, or 
any great city, and has been discharged for willful violation of law, such as 
the evidence shows these men were, should ever again be placed ina position of 
power or responsibility. Almost the first act of. Mayor Harrison was to re- 
move the Civil Service Commission that was in office when he was elected, 
which was done in open violation of both the spirit and letter of the law, and 
could only have been done for the purpose of furthering his own interests 
and appointing to positions men that he could better control than the me 
already in. 


The Civil Service Commissioners appointed by Mayor Harrison, it is true, 
were well known and highly respected citizens, and we are satisfied that the 
Commission in the first instance were inclined to obey the law, and that much 
could be said in mitigation of the violations of the law by the Commission. 


10 


But the fact remains that they were appointed by the Mayor and in a large 
degree, if he insists upon it, they are governed by his wishes (and in this © 
case the records show he insisted upon it). The Commissioners are algo de- 
pendent upon the city council for the means with which to conduet their 
office and transact the business of the Commission, and this again makes 
them more or less subject to the demands of the members of that body. The 
evidence shows that the members of the city council came, one at a time, 
and in pairs to the Commission, demanding that their friends should 
be. placed in office, and that the Commission should pay no-attention what- 
ever to the law. And the records also show that in almost, if not every, 
instance where these men with such records as we have herein deseribed, were 
appointed, it was done upon the demand of some alderman or some person 
having a pull with the administration; because the record abundantly shows 
the fact to be that the present mayor of Chicago has used the all-powerful 
infinence of his position to defeat and prevent the proper enforcement of the 
Civil Service Law, and thus embarrass the Civil Service Commission. From 
the beginning of the present administration there has been a determined and 
combined effort upon the part of the mayor and the several heads of depart+ 
ments to evade the Civil Service Law. The Law Department, acting under 
the direction and with the advice and consentof the mayor, has continuously 
annoyed and harrassed the Commission. Many opinions have been rendered 
holding the entire Civil Service. Act unconstitutional, thus encouraging the 
heads of departments to disobey the law and also disregard the rules of the Com- 
mission. ‘his materially prevented the enforcement of the law. The differ- 
ent departments seek to evade the law, and being encouraged therein, claim 
the privilege of using sixty-day men instead of choosing employés from the 
classified list; and the Commissioners were foreed, in the judgment of your 
Committee, by the mayor, to yield to this yiolation. This was done by the 
mayor and the different heads of ‘departments for the purpose of enabling 
them to put upon the pay-roll their politieal cohorts and ward-heelers without 
any reference to the good of the service. The different departments demand 
the right to appoint men to office without regard to the Civil Service Law. 


The city council of Chicago, acting under the advice, consent and approval 
of the mayor, passed an ordinance in July creating what the couneil desig- 
nated to be heads of departments, sub-heads, ete. This was done to remove 
the positions which were clearly within the elassified service, from the control 
of the Commissioners, and enable the mayor to appoint whomsoever he pleased 
to office. This resulted in getting the entire Civil Service Law before the 
Supreme Court, and that body has-recently handed down an opinion which 
shows that every action of the presen! city administration of the city of 
Chicago has been an open and palpable violation of the Civil Service Law: 
But the influence of the mayor, aldermen and the several heads of depart- 
ments, were not the only influenees which the Commission had to eontend 
with. The ward heelers, keepers of gambling houses, low dives, and places. 
of disrepute all joined in a clamorous demand for the appointment of their 
cohorts to office, and in this demand the mayor of Chieago lent the powerful 
influence of his oftice. 

It is apparent from the execution of the law and the difficulties whieh the 
Commission labored under that the administration now in foree in Chicago is. 
unalterably opposed to the merit system and has done everything in its power 
to destroy the law and nullify its provisions and has made it a mockery, a by- 
word anda sham. The sole purpose of the administration being to remove 
from office competent and capable men without any cause, in order to appoint 
their own friends to office, and in this way we ean readily account for the fact 
that there have been appointed to offlee many men of unsavory reputation and 
mental and physical unfitness, these men being endorsed by the heads of 
departments and appointed by the mayor. It is an old saying that "*When a 
great man dies the nation mourns.”’ This is equally true when a dishonest 
or incompetent man or one who inherits a name without inheriting the qual- 
ities possessed by the one who made the name great has been elevated to a_ 
great office, and this now seems to be the true condition in the city of Chieago. 

We recognize the fact that to great centers of population the eriminal and 
vicious drift, and it is also true that they exercise to a greater or less extent 
political influence because of their vast numbers and methods; and the purpose: 


Be 


of every good citizen should be to lend his influence to the end that only good 
men should be placed in office and that municipal government should be 
administered for the greatest good to the greatest number, and for the best 
preservation of life and property. 


The evidence before sae committee shows that the present mayor is in 
favor of a ‘‘wide open,’’ or, in the words of Chief Kipley, ‘‘a liberal govern- 
ment.’? Just what a liberal government meant, as used by the mayor and 
Chief Kiplee we are unable to tell, but its results have been detrimental in a 
large degree to the welfare and fair name of the great city of Chicago. 


Your committee believes that the Civil Service Commissioners originally 
would have been glad to enforce the Civil Service law, but such sowrental 
potent and dangerous influences surrounded the Commission in the dischar ge? 
of their duties and sought by every means possible to prevent and destroy the 
enforcement of the law, that. they were unable to resist. All these things are 
worthy to be taken into consideration, and should be considered in passing 
judgment upon the commission and their efforts to enforce the law, for your 
committee believe that while they have not discharged their duty under the 
law, yet your committee fully believe that the responsibility properly rests 
upon the present city administration of the city of Chicago, and that the fail- 
- ure of the law to be enforced should be charged to the undue and improper 
influence used by Mayor Harrison and_his supporters, who have in every in- 
stance, as the evidence shows, opposed the enforcement of the law and in- 
vented every possible means to defeat its operation. 


Ler 
THE POLICE PENSION ROLL. 


-A number of years ago the Legislature passed an act authorizing the or- 
ganization of a police pension board among the policemen of the city of Chi- 
cago. It was the thought of the Legislature at-the time to provide a means 
by which disabled policemen, after having served on the force for a number 
of years, and having paid into this fund, when they became disabled from 
service, might be retired and provided a means of support in their old age, 
and also to provide for the care of the widows and orphans of deceased police: 
men coming within the requirements of the act. The examination into the 
working of this law by your committee developed a state of facts tnat is really 
alarming. The evidence before your committee shows that a large number of 
men who were in many instances the very best men on the force, captains, 
sergeants, ‘lieutenants, with many years of experience and records of which 
any man might be proud, were removed and placed upon the pension roll, 
solely for the purpose of giving places to some other men who could not be 
promoted otherwise, and these men testified, many of them, before your com- 
mittee, that they were physically able to discharge the duties they were called 
upon to do when retired, and could fill the office of captain, desk sergeant, or 
almost any office in the department unless it be patrolmen, as well as they 
ever could in their lives, and many of them testified, and your committee be- 
lieve it to be true, that their experience on the force made them much more 
valuable to the citizens than any new man could possibly be without any ex- 
perience; yet they were retired, as we have stated, and were drawing from 
$40 to $180 per month out of the pension fund, which in the judgment of your 
committee should be sacredly preserved for disabled policemen, their widows 
and orphans, 


The result of this investigation evidently threw a new heht upon this law, 
and the citizens of Chicago and many policemen themselves say that the 
abuses must be remedied. Some of the men, in fact, testified before your 
committee that they were willing to remain on the police force in the positions 
that they occupied when they were retired and placed upon the pension roll, 
and would prefer doing so to retirement and receiving a pension. 


Your committee believes that 1t is a great detriment to the police service of 
the city of Chicago to have such men removed from office, and a great hard- 
ship and wrong upon the police pension fund to have men retired who are 
ready and willing and able to work, drawing pensions from the oe tha't 
should be preserved for persons in real need. 


12 


Your committee believes that the investigation of this department of the 
police will result in great good to deserving police officers, as well as to the 
police department generally. The police pension fund act, as passed by the 


General Assembly, if properly managed, will be of great benefit to disabled 


policemen, their widows and orphans; but so sacred a fund ought not to be 

used for the purpose of maintaining in enforced idleness men who are able and 

willing to do police duty who are forced on the pension roll for the purpose of 

making room for some one else. With these facts before the policemen of the 

city, we do not believe that they will permit any further abuse of this law, 

but will look well to it that the fund is preserved, as the law originally in- 
tended it should be, for the benefit of those who; by long service, have become 

disabled and unable longer to work, and to the widows and orphans of de- 

ceased policemen. 


Va 
THE ACTUAL WORKINGS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 


The police department of the city of Chicago is composed in round numbers 
of 3,000 men in its various departments; that a large majority of those men 
are faithful servants ofthe people and discharge their duty conscientiously in 
‘the enforcement of the law and in the protection of life and property, your 
committee have no doubt, but in view of the fact that the entire police depart- 
ment, notwithstanding the civil service law, is in the hands of the political 
party in power, and now in the hands of the mayor of the city, who is a parti- 
san, and in the very nature of the case must be, it is a fact well established 
by the evidence before your committee that it is not used to enforce the law, 
nor for the protection of life and property, but, upon the other hand, that it 
is even used, and is now being used, for the protection of all kinds of vice and 
for the furtherance of the political desires and ambitions of the present mayor. 


The evidence before your committee conclusively shows that the assign- 
ment of policemen to different parts of the city materially affects the condi- 


_/ tion of morals in that particular locality. In other words, if there are por- 


“tions of the city where there are a large number of gambling houses, pool 
rooms, houses of prostitution and opium dens, policemen ean be assigned to 
those respective localities who either do not see what is going on or wiil 
openly enter into agreement with them to protect them in their nefarious 
operations; and the evidence betore your committee shows that it was not an 
unfrequent thing for a policeman when assigned to duty in a certain place if 
he saw too much he was immediately removed to some other part of the city 
and aman took his place whose sight was not nearly so good. . 


Your committee find from the evidence, and believe it to be true, that the 
police department of any city is largely what the executive head of that city 
may make it. If the mayor of a city desires the enforcement of the law, de- 
sires life and property protected above everything else, he will appoint a 
chief of police whose aim and object will be to carry out his own views and 
to enforce the law; and your committee believe that with such a mayor and 
such a chief of police, the law could be enforced much better than it is, and 
life and property much better protected, but if the mayor does not desire the 
law enforced and prefers a ‘*‘wide open’’ or ‘‘liberal’’ government, ‘he will 
appoint a chief of police who is in favor of a ‘‘wide open’’ or ‘‘liberal’’ 
government, who will not himself see or know of any violations of law, and 
who can very readily communicate his own sight and his own want of knowl- 
edge to all the men under him. That such is the actual: workings of the 
police department at present in the city of Chicago can not be successfully 
denied. That there are policemen now on the foree in the city of Chicago 
who are not fit men to hold such places, the evidence justifies us in saying; 
that there are men on the police force recommended by the mayor and Civil 
Serviee Commission and appointed by the chief that no business man in the 
city of Chicago woulu employ to protect his life and property for an instant. 
The evidence shows that there are a great many men on the police force in 
the city of Chicago at the present time who either can not, or will not, see 
violations of law, the evidence justifies us in saying; that the actual work- 
ing of the present police foree in the eity of Chicago is not in the interest of 


13 


good government, is not conducted for the sole purpose of protecting life 
and property, but, upon the other hand, is used in such a manner as not to 
molest many forms of crime and vice that are open and notorious, and 
that in many instances, as shown by the evidence, the department has 
been receiving eontributions for protection to crime. This naturally grows 
out of, and is the result of the orders and management of the head of the de- 
partment, Chief Kipley, who testified before your committee that he was. 
carrying out the directions and instructions of the mayor. 


VI. 


THE CONDITION OF THE CITY AS TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW AND PRO- 
TECTION OF LIFE AND PROPERTY BY THE POLICE. 


The evidence before your committee conclusively shows that gambling in 
almost every form for months prior to the meeting of your committee\was 
running in the eity of Chicago wide open. The evidence shows a public 

gambling house at No. 6 Plymouth Place, where they were playing various 
_ kinds of games for money; that there was in said place daily 100 to 150 peo- 
ple; that the doors were open so that the people could go in and out at their 
leisure; that policemen were up and down the street in front of said premises 
and that the establishment was not molested; that there was another gambling 
place at No. 17 Plymouth Place, which is a public street in the city of Chi- 
cago, the doors were wide open, a large number of people in there playing 
for money daily, and they were not molested by the police. This establish- 
ment, the evidence shows, run day and night. Another place, at No. 311 
Clark street, is on the first floor, saloon in front and gambling in the rear. 
There were from 100 to 150 peop:e in this place daily, and that the uoors were 
open and any one could go in and out at their leisure, and it ran day and 
night. The evidence showed it was not molested by the police. Also at 430 
State street. which is one of the most public streets in the city of Chicago. In 
this place there were from 100 to 200 people daily and nightly playing all 
kinds of games, money in sight on the table and chips representing money, 
as any person could see that went in. There appeared tobe no privacy about 
it, as shown by the evidence, yet they were not molested by the police. At 
311 Clark street, another public place in the city of Chieago. This is the 
house at the same number as the one given before. One of the gambling 
houses is downstairs and the other one upstairs. About 150 people were con- 
stantly in this place, playing craps, poker and other games, money in sight, 
and anybody could see that wanted to; doors were wide open, and anybody 
went in that wanted to. There seemed to be no privacy exercised by the pro- 
prietors, and they were not molested by the police. 


We deem it unnecessary to mention any others by number. It is sufficient 
to say that the evidence shows a large number of places in all parts of the 
city in the most publie places, where the police, if they had been seeking to 
find them, could not have helped to do so. . 


Your comngttee further finds by the evidence that the proprietors of these 
several cadets places were indicted by the Grand Jury ot Cook county, after 
the police department had failed or neglected to do their duty, and that most 
of them either plead guilty or were fined for violating the law, or were tried 
and convicted; and the evidence further shows that immediately after the in- 
dietments of these men by the Grand Jury of Cook county, the chief of police, 
in his enthusiasm to enforce the law, issued an order that gambling houses 
should be closed, after they had already been closed by the sheriff. 


The evidence further shows that pool rooms were running wide open, or at 
least ‘‘liberally.”? That at 256 Clark street, in a large room, in a public. 
place, as many as 500 people were receiving telegrams of races all over the 
United States; that they were betting their money, receiving their checks, 
and after the races were publicly announced, were going to the cashier and ' 
receiving their pay. This was done in the presence of oftimes 500 people in 
the room, with the doors wide open, yet they were not disturbed by the 
police. Also at 269 Clark street and 250 Clark street; these are both large: 
rooms; from 250 to 600 people congregated in broad day light; doors wide open; 
were conducting gambling in an open manner, as we have above described. ' 
They were not molested by the police. At14 Custom House place, at 12 Ply- 


rai 


14 


> 


mouth Place, also at 17 Plymouth Place, 26 Jackson street, 21 Plymouth 


Place, and a large number of other places your committee might name, but 
this is sufficient to show that the evidence before your committee was conelu- 
sive that gambling and pool selling was running wide open in the city of 
‘Chicago for months prior to the assembling of your committee. 

The evidence before this committee further shows that these pool rooms 
were closed by the sheriff of Cook county and many of the men indicted and 
fined for gambling. 

The evidence before your committee further shows that this gambling and 


pool selling is a very profitable business for the parties running it; and not 


only gambling houses and pool rooms were running wide open, but slot ma- 
chines, for gambling purposes, were placed in public all over the city, and so 
far as the police were concerned, were allowed to run. 

The evidence further shows that at these several places where pool selling 
was going on policemen were in there, and, in many instanees, indulged in 
the game. The evidence shows that at nearly every place herein mentioned, 
and many others, Henry Kipley, a brother of the present chief of police of 
the city of Chicago, was preseat behind the counter, keeping tab of the amount 
of money received and paid out with the cashiers of those gambling institu- 


tions. The evidence further shows that Chief Kipley knew that his brother 


was in these places, his brother was on duty in the police department as a de- 
teetive, and under his oath of office and the ordinances of the city of Chicago, 
was bound to report the facts that came to his knowledge of the violation of 
the eity ordinances to his chief. 

The evidence further shows that in many of these other places not only 
Kipley, but other policemen and other detectives in the employ of the police 
department, were present and did know as a matter of fact that gambling was 
being run wide open in the city. And your committee does not believe that 


it is. possible that the chief of police of the eity of Chicago was not fully con- ~ 


versant of the fact that gambling was allowed, permitted and protected. 

The evidence before your committee shows that there were more hold-ups 
and robberies, more violations of the law on the streets of Chicago, during 
the past six months, possibly, than ever in the city of Chicago in the same 


length of time. It is not strange, however, that when the ordinary policeman — 


can see that gambling and many other forms of vice are winked at, if not 


openly protected, it is not strange, we repeat, that he should wink at other 


violations of law and have less respect for the enforcement of the law than he 
would have otherwise. 

It was also shown by the evidence before your committee that opium dens 
were permitted to run in open violation of law, and that the keepers thereof 
paid a tribute regularly to the police for not molesting them. - 


Your committee, therefore, are of the opinion that the actual workings of 
the present police department of the city of Chicago, is far from what it should 
be or what it could be easily made. ¢ 


VII. 


THE MANAGEMENT, CONTROL AND PROTECTION GIVEN THE DEPARTMENT BY ° 


THE, CHIEF OF POLICE. 


Under our law, the mayor of every municipality is in facet chief of police. 
Next to him in authority is the superintendent or chief of police, who is sup- 
posed to be and is responsible in a very large measure, together with the 
mayor, for the condition and working of the police department. It is not 
‘strange, however, in view of the evidence before your committee, that the 


present police organization of the city of Chicago, is not what it ought to be. 


It is not strange that the ideas of many of the present policemen, and their 
actions, are not in harmony with the best interests of good government, for 


it is exceedingly hard, yea, it is impossible for the stream to raise higher than — 


its source, and with a chief of police promulgating, as he said in his testimony 
before your committee, the ideas of the mayor with which he was in full sym- 
pathy, there never will be a good police foree, neither will there be that pro- 
tection of life and property and enforcement of the law that the good people 
of the city of Chicago have the right not only to demand but to expect. 


% 


wy 


The evidence before your committee first brings the present chief of police, 
very soon after his appointment into prominence, not in promulgating to his 
pohcemen orders for the preservation of property and life, but he first, ap- 
pears upon the stage as the originator of a great book scheme. Shortly 
after the present administration was in power, it was suggested to the chief 
by Captain Dollard, another police officer, that they proceed to make some 
money for the benefit of the department by having some publie sparring 
matches, in common parlance known as prize tights, in the city. which is an 
open violation of both the State laws and the city ordinances. The evidence 
shows that Chief Kipley. in answer said: ‘‘I said 1 would help him in any 
way I could.’’? When the prize fight scheme failed, the chief then proceeded, 
instead of discharging his duties as chief of police, to promulgate a great 
book scheme. This book scheme, the chief said, was practically originated 
by him, but submitted to the mayor for his approval. He then proceeded to 
employ some persons-to go out and solicit from the general public funds and 
to those solicitors he gave the following letter: | 


‘*CHicaGo, November 5th, 1897. 
To whom it may concern: 


“The police department is about to issue a_ history for the benefit of their 
relief fund. Kindly make all cheeks payable to Walter V. Magnus, East 
Chicago Avenue Station, and any favors shown the bearer will be appre- 
ciated by 

Yours truly, 


JOSEPH KipuEy, Chief of Police, 
And this is written on the official letter head of the department. 


Clothed with this letter from the chief of the police, Amos M. Atwell, a 
stranger in the city of Chicago, a man who had just got through with such a 
scheme in the city of Detroit, and who had been publicly deelared through 
the newspapers to be a fraud, and who had been arrested in Detroit for ob- 
taining money under false pretenses, all of which Chief Kipley admitted upon 
the stand he knew, he went forth with the letter of the chief, and the evidence 
shows that when he went to large corporations and presented this letter and 
unfolded the scheme, that they gave to him cheeks as high as $1,000, and that 
these collections went on from day to day and week to week, and so far as 
the evidence shows, not more than four or five people in the eity of Chicago 
were aware of the fact. The evidence shows it had originated in the mind of 
Kxipley, approved by the mayor and Robert E. Burke. Kipley selected Mag- 
nus, an appointee of the mayor’s, as treasurer, issued the letter to Atwell to 
go out soliciting funds, for which he was to receive 25 per cent., and Magnus 
10 per cent., and the good work went on until in the neighborhood of $8,000 
was collected, and in the hands of Magnus, and then this committee began 
its investigation, Mr. Atwell going on the stand. answering part of the ques- 
tions propounded to him and refusing to answer others, saying that the de- 
tails as to the amount, and from whom, ete., was all in the hands of Magnus, 
‘the treasurer gg We were promised by the city administration that Magnus 
would be fortheoming before the committee with books, papers, ete., but 
notwithstanding we made every effort to get, Mr. Magnus, the treasurer of 
Chief Kipley in his book scheme, after a conference with Kipley, we were 
unable to get him before the committee and were finally informed by a repre- 
sentative of the city administration that he had gone to Hot Springs or some 
other hot climate. 


The evidence before your committee shows that a number of similar schemes 
had been undertaken in various cities and also in the city of Chicago in times 
past; that they have always proved a farlure, the only result. being a large 
amount of money collected trom different people by letter sent out by the 
chief requesting it, and seldom, if ever, a book published, and if published at 
all, one of no value whatever, the money practically all going by way of com- 
missions, ete., to persons directly interested. 


The evidence further shows that the Policemen’s Benevolent Association 
proper, at the time of the Dreyer Bank failure, lost something over.$12,000; 
that when subscriptions to the book scheme of Kipley, Burke ond Harrison 


16 


were solicited representations were made that the treasury of said association 
was depleted, and that if the subscriber would make a liberal donation, the 
association would not only be placed firmly upon its feet again, but that 
would end solicitations. forever in the future for the support of the Police- 
men’s Benevolent Association of Chicago. Shortly after this committee began _ 
its investigation, Chief Kipley and his man Magnus proceeded to devise a way 
to place the moneys which had been collected by them under the control of 
the Poligemen’s Benevolent Association, in whose name the subscriptions had 
first been solicited. Dollard was sent for and requested to accept this money 
as treasurer of the association, but he declined, stating that until he was di- 
rected by the directors of the association to place it inthe treasury he would not 
do so. Then he was requested to accept it asan individual, pending action by 
that body and your committee, which he did. Subsequently the association 
repudiated this whole book scheme and declined to accept the money, which 
is still mm the bank, to the personal eredit of Mr. Dollard. We believe that 
this association acted wisely and by their conduct in the premises deserve the 
confidence and support of the people of Chicago. . 

Chief Kipley, while on the stand, admitted that he was practically a stranger 
to Atwell, und that he had heard ef the charges against him in other cities, 
yet notwithstanding this fact he placed in his hands the letter above referred 
to and sent him out to solicit funds from the business people of the city of 
Chicago to forward this book scheme of his. And your committee is of the 
opinion that had it not been appointed and began its investigation, that the 
solicitation of funds would be rapidly going forward at the present time. 
With these facts as to this book scheme presented to the public, we leave 
them to draw their own conclusions, and Chief Kipley and his assistants in 
the scheme to make their own explanations. 

To throw some further hght upon the actions of Chief Kipley in this book 
scheme we quote from his evidence: 

“*@. What was the talk you had with him? A. The principal talk I had 
in the matter was between Atwell and myself. 

@. What was that talk? A. That was about soliciting funds. 

Q. What was said to Mr. Atwell about that? A. Mr. Atwell wanted me. 
to give him a letter to give a number of gentlemen here in the city, that is, 
endorsing this book. 

@. Did yon do so? A. Yes, sir, I did. 

@. What did you say in that letter? A. I said, while I ean not reeall the 
exact words, ‘The official communication will be handed you by Atwell, who 
is soliciting funds for this book. Anything Mr. Atwell says in connection 
with this affair I will be responsible for,’ or words to that effect. 

@. Were you pretty well acquainted with Mr. Atwell? A. No, I did not 
know anything. about him much. I knew he was the promotor and solicitor 
of that. Mr. Magnus came with him and said he was all righ 

Q. Whatever Atwell said and did you backed? A. You o 


Q. Didn’t A. D. Atwell get a check from the Illinois Central railroad for 
a thousand dollars? A. The check found its way into Mr. Magnus’ hands. 

Q. I will ask you if he did not get it? Yousaid your instructions were not 
to take any checks at all? A. I said the money should be forwarded to Mr. 
Magnus. 

Q. Iwill ask you to state if Mr. Atwell did not take a check from every 
man who subseribed. A. I can’t say that. I[ don’t believe it. . 

Q. What did you instruct Mr. Atwell to say to the Illinois Central when 
he went to them for that subscription? A. I did not give him any instrue- 
tions at all. JI told him just what he could do. 

Q. Mr. Atwell is still in the employ of this book enterprise? A. Every- 
thing is at a standstill at present. | 

Q. What brought it to a standstill? A. Simply because we have had 
some criticism on the subject. : 


Vi 


ne aiies has pe been discharged? A. No, sir; but he is not doing any- 
ing just at present. 


Q. What induiry did you make about Mr. Atwell’s standing before you 
gave him your letter? A. Mr. Atwell came to me and showed me some of 
the different works that he had been engaged on. He worked some on 
Byrne’s book in New York and he also got up a book in Detroit. 


_ Q. Did he tell you how many times he had been arrested for getting money 
on false pretenses? A. I can give you some information on that subject. 


Q. That is more than Atwell will do? A. No, sir; he will tell you all he 
knows. 


Q. He refused to do it. Did you know that when: you talked with him 
about this book? A. I did not know anything about that. 


@. When you found out about that trouble, what did you do about it? A. 
[ talked with him about it and he explained his version and satisfied me be- 
yond question that he was all right. 


Q. I will get you to state if you thought it was the proper thing to do as 
chief of police of the city of Chicago, to give to a man to go out among busi- 
ness men, corporations and manufacturing establishments of the city, a letter 
from you telling them that everything this man did and said you. would be 
responsible for, if you knew he had been indicted and arrested and put in 
jail several times in different cities of the United States for defrauding the 
people out of money on this very same identical scheme? A. I don’t believe 
it. 

Q. Did you hear of it? A. I heard about Atwell but I never heard that 
he was guilty of the charge that you make, or has been arrested in every city. 

Q. Have you heard Atwell was arrested a number of times? <A. I read 
in the newspapers that he was arrested and has had trouble in Detroit. 

Q. I understand you are responsible for what Atwell said and you did it 
with malice aforethought when you sent him out? A. I sent him out to do 
what he did; I think he is a successful individual. . 

(. How long did it take him to collect the money? A. He has been at it 
for two or three months. 

(). What was Atwell to have for his collections? A. Twenty-five per 
cent. 

(). And Magnus to have 5 per cent; that makes 30? A. About that. 

Q. How much would it cost to publish that book? A. That book we ex- 
pected would cost us—we thought we could get the book out for about $1.50. 

@. What did you expect to sell it for? A. A five dollar bill. 

-Q. What was the contract with these other people who subscribed $1,000 
and $5002? A. No eontract; just a contribution on their part. 

Q. Ju contribution on their part entirely? A. Yes; nothing unusual 
for the IMffois Central and other corporations to contribute to a matter of 
that sort. 

Q. Will you give any other instance where the Illinois Central contributed 
$1,000 for a book to benefit the police of the city of Chicago? A. I will give 
you a reason why they should. 

Q. Iam not asking you that; will you answer my question? You said it 
was not an uncommon thing for them to do such a thing. A. I do not think 
it is particularly unusual why they should. 

. A moment ago you said it was not an uncommon thing for them to do 
it? A. There would be nothing unusual for them to do it, for the reason 
that all these big corporations are being enormously benefited by the effort:. 
of the police department, and if they are solicited to make contributions of 
that sort, there is nothing particularly wrong it it.’’ 

We think the above extracts from the testimony of Chief Kipley throws 
sufficient light upon the entire transaction, and the community will not be 
surprised when they learn that not only Mr. Magnus, since this investigation, 
has left the city, but Mr. Atwell’s address is also unknown at the present 


18 


time, and that Chief Kipley is now practically engaged in the business of 
trying to find somebody to take the money solicited from the business men 
of Chieago off his hands. k : 

‘“‘Q. Mr. Kipley, are you familiar with the ordinances of the city of Chi- 
ago? <A. Yes, sir. | 

Q. Did you take an oath of office when you became chief of police? A. 
Yes, sir. 

. What was that oath? A. You will solemnly swear that you will en- 

force the laws of the State and the ordinanees of the city. 


2 
Q. Is there an ordinance in this city against pool rooms, pool selling? <A. 
es. : 


Q. I will get you to state whether or not there has been any violation of 
that ordinance since you have been chief? A. I have no knowledge on that 
subject; that is, no positive knowledge on that subject. 


Q. Has anybody told you so? A. Well, it was said to me here some 
months ago that there were fellows around town who were selling pool, mak- 
ing pool, hand-books, and things of that sort. 


@. Have you a brother in the service? A. Yes, sir. 


Q. What position does he occupy? A. He is a detective under the police 
department. 


@. Do you know whether or not your brother, during the months of Oecto- 
ber, November and December, from day to day, and from time to time, dur- 
ing all of these months, was in rooms in this city that were running wide open 
selling pools? A. I do not know of my own knowledge but there was a 
complaint of that sort. 


Q. Did your brother ever report anything of that kind to you? <A. No. 
@. Did your brother ever tell you? A. I complained to my brother. 


@. When did you complain to him? -A. I said to him that it had been re- ~ 
ported to me that he had been around these places, and I told him he had 
better save his money and keep away from those pool rooms. It had been in- 
timated to me that he had got to be quite an enthusiastic better on horse 
races, and I told him to keep away from those places and save his money, 
and I tried to use my influence in getting him to stop. 


(). Did he take your advice? A. Well, that is very difficult for me to say. 
I don’t know. 


Q. What did he say when you ealled him down? <A. He said he was not 
doing anything.wrong; only went in there for the purpose of making a few 
little bets once in a while. I told him it was a violation of the law, and such 
things as that would not be tolerated, and that he was violating his oath of 
office by going into such places. 


Q. Did he tell you that there were places of that kind and hed been betting 
a little occasionally? A. No, he did not. 


Q. Didn’t you tell this committee a while ago that he told you that he 
went in there just for the purpose of making a little bet now and then? A. 1 
may possibly have added that remark. 


Q. As chief of police of the city of Chicago, why did you not say to him as 
a police officer ‘Go and arrest the men that are running that establishment, 
and stop it and keep your brother out of temptation?’ <A. I did. 


Q. How many pool rooms have you pulled—how many men have been ar- 
rested and convicted for pool selling since you have been chief? <A. I under- 
stood one fellow has been found guilty and fined $2,000. 


Q. Yes, but he was arrested by the sheriff of Cook county, indicted by the 
grand jury of Cook county, because the police would not do it. A I don’t 
Bah whether it was because the police would not do it, or because they could 
not do it. | 


19 


Q. Well, it was because they did not do it. Do you mean to say that you, 
as chief of police, with 3,500 sworn men— A. Don’t say 3,500 men; it is 
2,500 men. Don’t make it quite so strong. 

@. Do you say to this committee, that with 2,500 sworn policemen in this 
city, you are powerless to stop the pubhe running of pool room in this city? 
A. Iwill say that I am powerless to stop a man from making handbooks, or 
selling pools confidentially to his friends. 

@. Do you know of any pool rooms being conducted in this eity during 
the months ot October, November and December? A... I don’t know of my 
own knowledge. I never was in one. 

(J. Did any of your 2,500 men ever report anything of that kind to you? 
A. Inever had any definite report on that subject. 

(). They were giving the people a liberal government? A. Yes: things 
were running along very easy. 

(. Did you have any information, Mr. Kipley, during the months of Oc- ~ 
tober, November and December, that one, George Hankins, at No. 6 Ply- 
mouth place, was running a gambling house? A. No; I could not say posi- 
tively. 

@. Do vou know whether or not Hankins did run, during the months of 
Oetober, November and a portion of December, a gambling house in which 
was played cards and poker? A. I have no positive information upon that 
subject myself. . 

Q. Did any of your 2,500 policemen report anything of that kind to you? 
AL No, sir: . 

-@. Has there been, so far as you know, a prosecution during these three 
months, for a violation of the ordinance prohibiting gaming? A. I can not 
recall any. 

@. I will get you to state if itis nota fact that a large number of pool 
rooms were running openly with a telegraph operator in the place, pools were 
being sold, money paid, and everything running at full blast? A. I never 
was present. I don’t know anything about it. 

@. Was there any complaint to you of that kind of things being done? A. 
No particular complaint at all. The newspaper boys often came around and 
said there was pool selling going on at different places. 

@. Couldn’t the police of the city of Chicago as readily have found these 
people who have been fined for gambling as the sheriff? A. Well; I don’t 
know. I presume if a desperate effort had been made to look that kind of 
thing up, we might possibly have been successful. : 

Q. Iwill ask you if in the discharge of your duty, and in the interest of 
good government, you do not think you ought to have done that? A. I make 

it a point to do addathe police business I can. While a man may come to my 

office and give BP evetion that a certain individual is violating the law some- 

where, and it is #@trivial offense, [ do not pay so much attention to it as I do 

when a report reaches my office that a man has committed a serious crime, 

such as murder, that a serious crime has been committed on the outside. 
should naturally abandon that part of it and take up the more serious offense, 

and I have been looking after serious crimes, such as burglary, robbery and 

the hold up of people, and I have made a desperate effort to suppress that, 
and if you have been watching the papers on that subject you will be obliged 
to compliment me. 

Response: Yes, and you see some policemen are being arrested for hold- 
ing up a man? 

Kipley: Now, I want to say something—I want to say this. I tried that 
man yesterday. He got on the police department ten years ago, and he has 
always had a reputation of being a good officer, and the other morning he 
had been drinking some, and like everything else, became a little indiscreet, 
and started out to hold up a man, and got hold of a few dollars in_ that way, 
and under the impression, very likely, that he would never be discovered, 
and like everybody else, with his good record in the past, he was discharged 


20 


and reinstated, because many people vouched for him, and all said he was an 
excellent officer, but he stepped by the wayside and fell, and we had him ar- 
rested and discharged. ie - 


Then Chief Kipley’s attention was called to the evidence in detail as to the 
amount of gambling going on in the city and the public pool rooms that had 
been running when he insisted that he knew nothing about it, and that such 
a state of affairs, in his judgment, was hardly possible, but that if the evi- 
dence, as stated to him, was true, the police surely ought to have known it. 
He was then asked about his order closing gambling houses and ordering the 
houses of that character to go south of Jackson street, and we quote the 
evidence on that subject: 


“*(. Will you tell me the man that you told that this crap business had got 
to be stopped? A. I talked with the officers in a general way about it. 


(). When was that order promulgated? A. Withm the last month. 
®. Within the last fifteen days, wasn’tit? A. .I guessabout a month now. 


(). When was the order promulgated that these things must all go south of 
a certain street—south of Jackson street? A. ‘I'hat was very early. There 
never was any order issued on that subject particularly. 


@. What was the order? A. It was simply a conversation that I had with 
the newspaper men. I simply said: ‘Now, any fellow who wants to bet on 
horse races or anything of that sort ean not be allowed to do it this side of 
Jackson street because we don’t want this section of the town polluted with 
this class of things. We want those boys who have an inelination to bet on 
horse races to go south.’ | 


@. What have you got against the people south of Jackson street? A. I 
hike them. 


Q. Is that the reason you wanted that stuff to godown there? A. Things 
are very lively inthe lower part of the town, everything has a thrifty appear- 
ance, and everything— 


(. You mean south of Jackson street? A. North of Jackson; and things 
up south of Jackson are virtually dead; there is nothing going on at all, and 
the stores are all empty. There is nothing doing, and the property is depre- 
ciating in value, and the object was to liven things up a little bit.’’ 


_ We have quoted thus liberally from the evidence of Chief Kipley to show 
fully the character of the man who is now the present chief of police of the 
city of Chicago, and taking many of the answers of the chief as they appear 
in the record, together with his actions as such, if he is as he says, carrying 
out the policy of the present mayor of the city of Chicago, and as he further 
says, with which he is in full sympathy, it is not strange that the present sys- 
tem of police is in that chaotic and demoralized state in which we find it. 


We ean hardly conceive in this day of enlightened sentiment, of a man 
selected as chief of police of the second greatest city in the VY, d States, 
when speaking of a police officer who, while under the ise liquor, 
with his revolver in one hand, and his club in the other, assaults*#titizen and 
takes from him his money on ‘the public street, refers to it as being an act of 
indiscretion, and apologizes for him in every possible way. But our imagi- 
nation must be even stretched further than that, when we recall the evidence © 
from his own mouth wherein he says that a certain portion of the city over 
which he is appointed guardian, and whose sworn duty it is to protect life 
and property, and to enforce the ordinances, states that he has ordered 
gambling houses and all houses of that sort south of a certain street in the 
city, because business is dull and for the purpose of livening it up. Howa 
man can reconcile statements of that character, backed up as they are in this 
ease, by his actions as chief of police with his oath of offiee, is beyond the 
comprehension of this Committee, and it occurs to the Committee that if the 
mayor has at heart the welfare of the citizens of the municipality over which 
he presides, he could not do less than to remove a man whose ideas of justice 
oe Ae enforcement of the law are such as Chief Kipley’s evidence shows 

is to be. 


21 


Your committee beg leave to acknowledge material assistance in their in- 
vestigation from the Civic Federation, Municipal Voters’ League and a num- 
ber ot other organizations of a similar character and for a similar purpose in 
the city of Chicago, as well as a large number of letters received from citi- 
zens offering their assistance and giving directions and information to the 
committee, which was of great value. To all of these people the committee 
desire to return their thanks. 


Now, in regard to the justice courts, the evidence shows that the present 
system of justice or police courts, as run, 18 a disgrace to the present elvili- 
zation. It shows that justices’ courts will open in the night time, policemen 
will go out and drag in men and women, 100 or 200, and even more at a 
time; that they are refused a trial at night, required to give a bond, for which 
the justice charges them $1.00; that professional bondsmen are in attendance 
who will colleet another $1.00, and oftimes much more for the poor unfortu- 
nate to go on his or her bond until morning, thus making several hundred 
dollars oftimes in a night to the police justice and other officers connected 
with the. court, and this is done, as your committee believe from the evidence, 
for the purpose of making money for the police justice, the professional bonds- 
man and the police officers in charge of the arrest. The justices of the peace 
of the eity of Chicago assigned to the police duty are paid a salary by the city, 
and under their contract required to turn all fees collected by them during 
office hours, and in the administration of their duties to the city, but are not 
required to turn in the money collected by them for services in the night time, 
nor are they required to turn in the costs collected in State cases. The evi- 
dence before the committee shows that in order to secure for themselves the 
costs, a large amount of the business was transacted_in the night, and also a 
great many cases were brought in the name of the State of Illinois, thereby 
defrauding the city of Chicago out of all its fees that they properly should 
have, which would amount to thousands of dollars annually. 


In conclusion, your committee deems the following facts to be shown from 
the evidence, and believes they have so shown them to the satisfaction of any 
person who will take the pains to read the evidence herewith submitted: 


First. That the Civil Service law of the city of Chicago, adopted by the 
people thereof for their government, has been through the influence of the 
present mayor, practically set aside and held for naught. 


Second. That the law, as administered by the present administration, is a 
sham and delusion. 


Third. That the mayor removed from office the Civil Service Commis- 
sioners that were in office at the time of his inauguration without any -au- 
thority of law whatever. 

Fourth. That a large number of persons have been discharged from the 
police foree without cause and in violation of law. 


Fifth. That a large number of persons have been appointed by the police 
department a oe of the mayor and with the consent of the Civil 
Service Comn , who, thei records show, are wholly unfit for policemen. 


Sixth. ThatMe police pension law was being used for the purpose of Te- 
tiring men well fitted to discharge their duties upon the retired list. for the 
purpose of giving places to the friends of the administration in power, and 
that the police fund, which is a sacred fund, was being used for the purpose 
of paying these men, who should be upon the police foree earning their living 
and who testified before your committee that they preferred to be upon the 
police force, and were able and willing to perform the service. 


Seventh. That this investigation of the pension law willresult in a number 
of men who are now on the pension rolls being put into active service, and 
thereby result in a great saving of that fund for the use for which it was in- 
tended, namely, disabled*policemen and'the widows and orphans of deceased 
policemen. 


_ Kighth. That under the present city.administration gambling and pool 

selling was allowed.to run wide open, the evidence showing conelusively that 
a large number of houses were being publicly run as gambling houses and 
pool rooms, and that they were not molested by the police, and the evidence 


22 
tended largely to show that they were contributing to the police department 
for protection; that opium dens were allowed to run in various parts of the 
city, principally by Chinamen, aud that they paid the police for protection; 
that the chief of police, with a few other members of the present police de- 
partment, were engaged in a book scheme which, to say the least, _was highly 
improper, if not absolutely dishonest. 


Ninth. That the investigation of the publication of the so- ealled police 
book will protect the policemen’s Benevolent Association, from destruction, 
.which would necessarily have followed had this book deal been consummated, 
and therefore that fund which is being used by that Association for the main- 
tenance of its widows, and care and edueation of its orphans, will be main- 
tained and continue to do good for deserving police officers and their families. 


In conelusion your committee recognizes that the police department of any 
eity, in order to be of the character that it should be and render that service 
to which the people are entitled for the protection of life and property, should 
be removed in some manner, as far as possible, from politics, and should be 
governed and appointed by some means and in some manner, so that they 
would be retained alone upon their merits and discharged only for cause. 


Your committee have endeavored to simply eall the attention of this 
honorable body to the facts as they found them, and the condition of things 
as they aetually exist; that there is a great need of some remedy no one can 
doubt, but without assuming to make any suggestions or recommendations, 
we most respectfully submit the above for your consideration. 


By order of the committee. 
O. F. BERRY, 


Chairman. 


wn 


3 0112 09842 


ON 


